Article 13 (entry and/or remain) 214 0 Article 14 (visa free entry) 0 0 “Take charge”: Article 16 0 0 “Take charge” humanitarian clause: Article 17(2) 6 3 “Take back”: Articles 18 and 20(5) 16,106 290 Article 18 (1) (b) 16,094 289 Article 18 (1) (c) 12 1 Article 18 (1) (d) 0 0 Article 20(5) 0 0 Source: Eurostat as of 26 June 2025, total (including re-examination requests) GCR does not currently have information regarding the practice of all Member States following the CJEU ruling in the Mengesteab case and CJEU judgment in C-47/17 and C-48/17, and GCR’s request for relevant information for 2023 from the MoMA was not answered. According to information provided by other organisations present in Greece, in 2024 German and Austrian authorities continued to consider that the time runs from the day of the informal request for asylum.482 Based on GCR’s and other organisations’ experience, during 2022, as in previous years, there were specificities in the handling of cases based on the Member State the outgoing request is addressed to. Specifically, the Greek Dublin Unit submits all take charge requests within the three-month time limit foreseen in the Regulation.483 The time starts from the moment an application for international protection is officially registered with the Asylum Service. However, the German authorities, following the ruling of the CJEU in the Mengesteab case on 26 July 2017484 consider that the three-month time limit for sending a request to another country starts when the intention to apply for asylum is expressed; formal registration of the application with the Asylum Service is not required. To avoid rejection letters based on this argument, the Greek Dublin Unit tries to send the take charge requests within three-months from the expression of the intention to apply for asylum. 485 Regarding family reunification cases, if the Greek Dublin Unit is not informed within three months following the expression of the intention to apply for asylum, but is informed within three months from the registration of the asylum application, it sends the take charge request to the German authorities under the nondiscretionary Articles (8, 9, 10), this request will meet the time limit set out in the Regulation. Furthermore, some Member States’ interpretation of the CJEU judgment in the Joined Cases C-47/17 and C-48/17486 has resulted in rejections of requests. Following this judgment, the German Dublin Unit accepts only one re-examination request for each case and refuses to keep cases open even when further medical tests for the establishment of the family link are pending. The German Dublin Unit claims that there is no possibility to deviate from the deadlines of the Dublin III Regulation. The Netherlands, France, Sweden and the United Kingdom are among the Member States which have also followed the same practice rejecting cases on this ground. According to GCR’s knowledge, the German authorities continue to implement this judgment. NGOs noted that, during 2022, Swedish authorities also rejected cases on this ground. In general, an extension is requested if a DNA procedure is pending and not expected to be completed within the two-week timeframe. This request is accepted by almost all the Member States, apart from Germany, which might reject a re-examination request on the basis that the results proving the family link were not submitted in due time. 482 483 484 485 486 Information provided by NGOs, valid as of January 2025. Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (recast). CJEU, C-670/16, Tsegezab Mengesteab v Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Judgment of 26 July 2017, available at: https://bit.ly/3MXWEuK. Based on GCR’s observations from the field. CJEU, Joined Cases C-47/17 and C-48/17, X v. Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie, Request for a preliminary ruling, Judgment of 13 November 2018, available at: https://bit.ly/2KpcqiA. 92